Trusted/un-trusted client feature

[hwware]

This covers initial part of issue #469 . As @zuiderkwast mentioned in the issue, implemented all clients will be untrusted. To be trusted the IP of the client should be added in the trusted-addresses config. This code also has implementation of the function which retrieves the netmask of the IP, this wil be helpful for next coming enhancements of the feature.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 73.33333% with 24 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.16%. Comparing base (6a5a11f) to head (5950bf7). Report is 160 commits behind head on unstable.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/config.c	67.30%	17 Missing :warning:
src/networking.c	68.42%	6 Missing :warning:
src/trusted_network.c	90.90%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           unstable     #666      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     70.15%   70.16%   +0.01%     
============================================
  Files           112      113       +1     
  Lines         60537    60620      +83     
============================================
+ Hits          42471    42536      +65     
- Misses        18066    18084      +18     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/anet.c	72.83% <100.00%> (+0.16%)	:arrow_up:
src/cluster_legacy.c	86.16% <100.00%> (-0.17%)	:arrow_down:
src/server.c	88.55% <ø> (ø)
src/server.h	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/socket.c	91.32% <100.00%> (+0.05%)	:arrow_up:
src/tls.c	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/unix.c	76.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/trusted_network.c	90.90% <90.90%> (ø)
src/networking.c	88.61% <68.42%> (-0.19%)	:arrow_down:
src/config.c	78.05% <67.30%> (-0.38%)	:arrow_down:

... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

[ranshid]

On a general level I think that (given the pr ID) this PR is very risky :)

[hwware]

On a general level I think that (given the pr ID) this PR is very risky :)

Why you think it is the risky? it is about this feature? could you tell me more? ^-^?

[ranshid]

On a general level I think that (given the pr ID) this PR is very risky :)

Why you think it is the risky? it is about this feature? could you tell me more? ^-^?

the PR id is #666... I dno... sounds risky :)